Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-07-01
THE CONTEMPT CASE.
.E.Y. CANNON AND Nh. c. L. TODD
BEFORE THE cHAxCERy coURT.
striking Addresses BY Constellation
BY the Court Deferred uatii
Morrow.


Court yesterday morning to answer the
rule issued against them by Judge Holia-
day for contempt in reading the protest
against the resale Of the Galego Mills, as
ordered by the Court. The courtroom
WIS crowced with spectators, mostly law.
yers. and tie proceedings we're interesting
throughout and at times spicy.
THE ANSWER.
A. soon as the case OF Mr.. Cannon was
called EX.Judge Joseph Christian, counsel
on this occasion foT respondents, arose and
beean an address 10 the Court. He had
mo- long proceeded when Judge Holladay
interrupted, and asked him II he had Mr..
CannOn's answer to the rule.
"IoS, sir" answered Judge Christian.
"Rtsd the answer, and then you can
make your argument" said the Judge.
The following paper was then read;
In answer to a rule by the Judge of the
Chancery Court OF the city Of Richmond.
and served upon him this day, your re.
pondent, Edward Y. Cannon, says II is
true thst he and his associate in this case,
Robert G.. Scott, Esq, did advise their
client 10 appeal from a decree OF said
Chaucery Court refusing 10 confirm the
sale OF the yaid GallegO-Mills property
made on the 20th day OF April. 1887,
And ordering a ress'e OF said pro-
perty. But this respondent, so far from
designing sny actual or constructive
contempt OF the Court strdlously sought In
preparing the paper complained OF 20 avoid
the appearance of such design. That FROM
that decree their client obtained from the
supreme Court OF Appeals an appeal which
was perfected by their client giving the
bond required by the Court that pending
this appeal the property was again offered
for sale under decree OF this Court, and
that at this second sale your respondent, as
one OF the counsel for Charles l.. Todd. did
read TO the crowd OF bidders who were
present the paper whichlis copied in the
order Of the Court, entered on the 29th day
Of June, 1887, In winch order this respon-
dent as well as sand Charles l.. Todd are
summoned to show cause before this
Court, II any they can, on the 30th day of
June, 1897, at the hour Of IL A. NJ. why
they should not be attached for their con-
tempt OF this Court in the premises.
Your respondent respectfully submits
that as counsel practicing In this court and
in the Supreme Court OF Appeals he has
the right and it was his bounden duty to
advise his client as TO his interests and
rights in this litigation, and in pursuance
Of this right aud duty he and his said asso-
ciate did advise their client TO apply for an
appeal from the decree OF said Court re-
fusing TO confirm the sale to their client,
and did obtain the appeal, and the
same was perfected by giving the
necessary bond. At the last sale
your respondent and his said asso-
ciate believing that good faith and fair deal
ing 10 the bidders assembled at the sale re-
Qured that thew should be informed that
their client bad already obtained an appeal
end would insist upon his rights under
that appeal. simply announced that fact by
reading the paper above referred to and
copied In the order Of the Court.
Your respondent, who has be5h for
many years a practitioner at :hIs bar,
and who hiss always endeayored to dc
mean himself with the courtesy and re-
spect always due from the bar to the
bench, Is at a loss 10 know upon what
possible GROUND be can be required to
appear at the bar of this court to show
cause why he should not be attached for
contempt, when the record shows that in
the legitimate discharge'of his professional
duty be simply advised his client as TO his
legal rights.
The bar has its rights as well as the
bench, and one Of the highest duties Of a
lawyer Is 10 protect his client and to advise
him of his legal rights. IL is cer-
tainly no contempt OF an inferior
court TO obtain an appeal from an
alleged or supposed erroneous deci- |
sion, nor is 1t a contempt Of that court to |
announce the fact that an appeal has been |
obtained and that the appellant will stand |
upon his legal rights. II this is not true, |
every inferior court might fine and impri" |
son counsel who advises and obtains an APP |
peal from an erroneous decision and an |
A.. - - 1Et -. 4
such an appeal and be intends TO |
the head and front Of your re- |
spondents offending. What he did |
was done under conscientious con- |
yiction Of bis professional duty; and this |
respondent respectfully submits that no |
court has the right to call IN question the |
motive or action OF counsel in giving legal |
advice, especially when such action does |
not at all reflect upon the decision OF the |
court from which the appeal Is taken. |
Having answered. he prays to have the rule |
discharged. EDWARD y. CANNON,
by Joseph Christian, his counsel.
A. the paper had not been sworn TO, at |
a hint from the Court Mr.. Cannon came |
forward 10 the deputy clerk, who admin |
.tered the pgouer oath.
Judge Christian then said: "While |
sm up will read Mr.. Todd's answer"
The Court replied "We are now con-
'idering Mr.. Cannon's answer"
THE ONE CHERRY.
Judge Christian said he did not like to |
take two bites at one cherry, and started |
to read Mr. Todd's letter, when he was
ruled down by the Court.
The Judge then commenced his |
argument. lie began by saying |
that it was his privilege and pleasure TO ap- |
pear in court not only a. counsel for his /
clients, but representing the whole bar and |
every client OF every lawyer in the State.
''This is q remarkable case" continued he; |
zone without precedent in the annals OF
the law. The question is whether law.
yer giving 10 his client conscientious adj
wee is 10 be brought before this tribunal |
for contempt OF court, and the further ques-
lion. how far any court can fine or lm prison
a lawyer for giving 10 his client advice as
10 bis rights.
LAWYERS RIGHTS.
al insist that every lawyer has the right /
10 advise and instruct his client as TO bis |
legal rights, and that no court any where
has any right TO question the motives or
The action OF counsel in advising his client.
The bar has its rights SIS well as the bench,
and lawyer is unworthy OF bis profession
who does not iearlessly advise his client as
10 LIZ legal rights.
RESPONSIBILITIES on TIE BAR.
"Tbe truth l. that every human rlSht OF
life, liberty, and property are to great
degree m the hands OF the bar OF every
state, and no court has any right to restralna
lawyer from giving his conscientious views
q what the law is and tue rights OF his
clients.
'Hn every age Of the world and TO every
civilized country the bar has been the iore'
most power TO defend and guard and pro-
tect human rights aud human liberty.
BLOW AT CIVIL LIBERTY.
Wherever blow has been struck ior
civil liberty tbroughoutthe world mempers
Of the bar have always been In the iron, IN
defence Of human rights.
II make these remarks because ooe OF
the oldest aud most distinguished members
Of this bar has been arraigned before this
tribunal 10 show cause why re should mol
BE- fined and imprisoned for contempt
THE STATUTE.
81 deny the power OF this Court 70 I'M
pose any fine. The statute plainly gives
the only eases In which fine can be im.
posed for contempt. (Ilcre the Judge read
the statute.) Now, / submit that the
conduct Of Edward Y. Cannon, tne
counsel, and Charles l.. Todd, his
client does moi eon,e within the puf- I